I think the Arbcom should accomodate a separate "case-review"

facility, and that the Arbcom should grow to accomodate the growing need for clear and documented review.

There is something of this in the blocking policy.

From WP:BLOCK:

~Personal attacks which place users in danger

~Blocks may be imposed in instances where threats have been made or actions performed (including actions outside the Wikipedia site) which expose other Wikipedia editors to political, religious or other persecution by government, their employer or any others. In such a case a block for a period of time may be applied immediately by any sysop upon discovery. Sysops applying such sanctions should confidentially notify the members of the Arbitration Committee and Jimbo Wales of what they have done and why. See No personal attacks.

~This provision is rarely used.

"Sysops applying such sanctions should confidentially notify the members of the Arbitration Committee and Jimbo Wales of what they have done and why." Sounds to me like there is a proceedure built in for the ArbCom and Jimbo to review such blocks. Whether or not this proceedure is followed, or even if most admins are aware of it, I cannot say, but there does seem to be a saftey valve in the system. I know that if I ever placed such a block, I'd make the notification, whether it was policy or not, because the actions leading to the block are the sort of things the "higher-ups" should be aware of.

Essjay --------- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Essjay Wikipedia:The Free Encyclopedia www.wikipedia.org

_________________________________________________________________ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/